Well I guess by now we've all heard that Saddam Hussein had been captured by the United States near his hometown of Tikrit. What's your thoughts about the situation?

I'll share a few of mine:

1. If Saddam has been staying around Tikrit, as reports have been for the past half year, then he deserves to get caught. It's just plain stupid someone would stay in an area where the US military dogs are hunting closely.

2. By now, Saddam probably didn't have any real power left - people widely believe, as the US officials on tv said today, that the violence and insurgencies are widespread and from different factions. Did Saddam look like he could be in control of anything of significance? While this may be a short term victory for Bush, the glory will probably be eroded in a month or two as these attacks continue, and perhaps spread with greater arab/palestiniane support against the US.

3. Perhaps now George Bush will finally put his focus back on our problems - economic, social, etc. - here in the United States (you remember, the country he was appointed to run in the first place!).

4. Perhaps now George Bush will finally get back to the War On Terror (yes, the war that has been largely ignored the past 2 years - the one with Osama/Pakistan/Saudis who barrelled into our World Trade Center; Iraq was never included in that just war on terror).

George has cost us FAR too much blood and money with his unjustified lust for Saddam.

:-) now your turn

__________________
[ PHILLYTIM.NET ]
ROCK AND ROLL HAS ARRIVED & THE STREET SHACKLES ON THIS CITY ARE GONE!

From the responses of Iraqi exiles and some of the Iraqi people, it appears that the war has had some value for a great many people. But at the same time, the scandals that have arisen regarding contracts in Iraq, raise more questions about the reasons behind the war.

It remains to be seen what the results of this victory for GW and our forces will be. I wonder who is organizing the raids and violence that continue in Iraq?

it's a big boost for bush and hopefully will help bring peace to the area. I ahve a friend scheduled to be stationed there in Feb. If the killing continues, in the LR it will mean less .

To recap the last twenty years, republicans under Reagan befriended and supported Saddam Hussein with the goal of projecting power into the Middle East. Over the last eighteen months George W. Bush lied to the American people by claiming the certain knowledge that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, ties to terrorism, and represented a clear and immediate threat to America and the world. Whether you're talking about Reagan or Bush, the real goal of the republicans remains unchanged. Due to their obsession with oil, they are still seeking to project power into the Middle East. So, out with the old dictator and in with . . . well, nobody knows. But you can bet that whoever he is, he'll support the United States and its oil interests in the region, for a while, anyway. And twenty years from now, do you suspect that Secretary of State Paul Bremer will be announcing that the brutal, repressive Iraqi dictator, who received authority from Bremer's CPA some twenty years earlier, must be removed from power by force? I'd give you even odds.

__________________
Philly Chit Chat
www.PhillyChitChat.com/

HughE, your above post is right on target, I can't believe more people don't see it. I know a lot do, but sooooo many are just completely snowed by the pep rally mentality. Having said that, since we have sacrificed so many of our soldiers to get this clown, I am glad that at least we have some closure.

to recap the last 50 years. america squanders wealth on war, aid, and farm subsidies. europe builds nice railways but no bombs. if there is something that doesn't change much fomr one admin to the next, it's foreign policy. let us not forget that billy and hillary fully supported the actions in iraq.

Just to throw this out there, if we made the dictator and caused the torment of his people by our past mistakes, shouldn't we view it as part of our responsibility to correct those mistakes? Thus, this war would be a part of that and would be justified. Also, looking at the attrocities that were committed, isn't bringing this guy to justicxe a worthy cause? I think that the ultimate measure of things is not what my opinion or your opinion of the war is, but the opinion of the actual people fighting it is. And thus far, that seems to be positive.

I have no illusions that these were not the only o even the main reasons for this war, but...shouldn't they be considered?

Here's another good thought that I had in mind about this situation:

Washington Congressmen Questions the Timing of Saddam Capture


This idea had been brought up all along, since the start of this invasion last March, and lately when Hillary Clinton verbalized it from what she saw on her trip to Iraq - the politicizing of the war events to the roadmap for George Bush's '04 election bid.

Think about it: milestones (capturing saddam, finding this or that, etc.) are made every so often to keep our citizens interest alive in the situation, and successes grow greater to fuel up George's election ammunition.

To say the very least: it's unfortunate that George Bush is costing the American people their own blood for his "grandeur".

__________________
[ PHILLYTIM.NET ]
ROCK AND ROLL HAS ARRIVED & THE STREET SHACKLES ON THIS CITY ARE GONE!

Hussein was obviously no longer involved in the command structure of the Iraqi resistance- so his capture, while significant is largely a symbolic victory. There is still a long road ahead for the military and more importantly the transitional government to pursue peace and stability in Iraq, and the Arab world.

By the way where are the weapons of mass destruction?? Oh, there aren't any- that's what I thought. Did Bush unilaterally attack Iraq and bomb them back into the stone age just to get Sadam? It would certainly appear that Bush had several motivations in attacking and occupying Iraq:

1) to avenge Sadam on behalf of his father- he was quoted as saying as much in a recent article in the NY Times.

2) to eliminate a rogue dictator in the hopes of scoring some political and popularity points, and do some nation-building

3) to drum up some lucrative business deals for his buddies over at Haliburton (where VP Cheney was the former CEO).

4) to distract the American people from the 9/11 cover up, and the classification of trade secrets (also to help his corporate buddies- see this week's issue of U.S. News & World Report for the full story)

link to U.S. News article:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/0.../22secrecy.htm

I support our troops 100%, I just believe strongly that the president needs to be held much more accountable for his decisions regarding Iraq, and his shameful protection of corporate fat cats.

peace,

J

If we don't agree with you, we must be snowed. :roll:

__________________
Jason
Lynn Swann 06'

"Individualism is absent when other peoples' standards, not reality and reason, are ones primary guide."